Re: Packages not supportable in squeeze-lts
On 19. mai 2014, at 15:27, Moritz Muehlenhoff <jmm@inutil.org> wrote:
> On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 08:52:04AM +0200, Jan Ingvoldstad wrote:
>> On 16. mai 2014, at 22:07, Matt Palmer <mpalmer@debian.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> On the other hand, I do like the idea of providing alternate kernels,
>>> although I wonder if the regular backported kernel isn't enough for people?
>>
>> No, they're not, because there isn't security support as we understand it in the stable branch.
>>
>> See for instance the recent kernel vulnerability fix; it's not yet there in backports.
>
> No, that's different:
> backports.debian.org rebuilds the latest Linux kernel in Debian
> testing, i.e. 3.14.4-1
My apologies for not disambiguating between squeeze-backports and wheezy-backports.
The current version in squeeze-backports is 3.2.54-2~bpo60+1, and as far as I can tell, it hasn't been touched since March.
>
> What is being proposed here is to provide a backport of the latest kernel
> in Debian stable, i.e. 3.2.57-3+deb7u1. The security update for stable is
> available for a week now.
Yup.
Given that there is at least some work having been done on squeeze-backports, I think some care should be taken not to perform double work here.
I think that backporting the latest Debian wheezy kernel to squeeze-lts makes sense, though.
I must admit that I've been banging my head quite a lot when attempting to build a new/patched Linux kernel as a drop-in upgrade of the system's current version, so I suspect that a lot of admins out there would appreciate it.
--
Cheers,
Jan
Reply to: